Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
vren55

Vren55's Ultimate General Civil War Guide 1.0+ Updated

Recommended Posts

Just now, The Soldier said:

What's better than a fast-firing, long-range, accurate rifle with devastating melee?

... Not much TBH.

*Rages* XD Your luck is astonishing. 

Edited by vren55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vren55 said:

... Not much TBH.

*Rages* XD Your luck is astonishing. 

Luck?  I should have gotten 10,500 CS Richmonds from Chancellorsville, not these shitty Tyler Texas things. :P I feel cheated, not lucky!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Soldier said:

Luck?  I should have gotten 10,500 CS Richmonds from Chancellorsville, not these shitty Tyler Texas things. :P I feel cheated, not lucky!

... but aren't the Tyler Texas's even rarer than Richmonds? And therefore better?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, vren55 said:

... but aren't the Tyler Texas's even rarer than Richmonds? And therefore better?

 

Tyler Texas rifles are (effectively) buffed MJ&G Type IIs, which are improved M1841 Mississippi Rifles.  Slower rate of fire and less accuracy than the other standard rifles like the superior Enfield and the M1855.  Hell, even the Lorenz rifles beats it by being cheaper and having a massive edge in accuracy, with only lagging in rate of fire by some.  However, in my experiences with these 10,500 Tyler Texas (and despite being overpriced, I didn't have to spend money on them - well, not directly at least, I lost 17 thousand good men for that disappointing haul), I will say they perform admirably.  Just don't count on them to win the battle by themselves.

Some weapon pricing and balancing has to be done, me thinks.

Edited by The Soldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When do you all start to see artillery batteries perform worse with more guns than they did when they were smaller?  like, a battery of 24 guns performs very poorly.  Where do you start to see the drop-off because the battery is too big?  12 guns?  16 guns?  what's the max size you can make a battery before it just starts to perform like crap? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Don't Escrow Taxes said:

When do you all start to see artillery batteries perform worse with more guns than they did when they were smaller?  like, a battery of 24 guns performs very poorly.  Where do you start to see the drop-off because the battery is too big?  12 guns?  16 guns?  what's the max size you can make a battery before it just starts to perform like crap? 

this partly depends on the assigned commander. Higher levels will provide a higher threshold before drop-off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Don't Escrow Taxes said:

When do you all start to see artillery batteries perform worse with more guns than they did when they were smaller?  like, a battery of 24 guns performs very poorly.  Where do you start to see the drop-off because the battery is too big?  12 guns?  16 guns?  what's the max size you can make a battery before it just starts to perform like crap? 

I'm not entirely sure. I just noticed that one of my 24 batteries somehow got the same number of kills as my 12 gun batteries. I think though this is mainly due to rotation speed. Bigger gun batteries are very slow to rotate.

It's not that it performs like crap. In facct,a  bigger gun battery is nice in defense b/c its durable and you can put it up in the line, but it does impede performance. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Don't Escrow Taxes said:

When do you all start to see artillery batteries perform worse with more guns than they did when they were smaller?  like, a battery of 24 guns performs very poorly.  Where do you start to see the drop-off because the battery is too big?  12 guns?  16 guns?  what's the max size you can make a battery before it just starts to perform like crap? 

Check the command stat.  Also, hover over the Efficiency stat and see if it has a nice warning text in red.  If it does, your officers don't have enough experience to command those men and will have their efficiency nerfed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not worried about the command stat or efficiency stat.  I have a battery of 24lb howitzers commanded by a major general.  When it was smaller it did thousands of kills.  Now it does a couple of hundred.  And it is not a question of rotation either in some cases (i could see how it would be in some cases though) but it performs like crap in static defense scenarios.  I realize what I'm asking for is anecdotal rather than specific but i'm just curious what the opinion is.  24 gun batteries, to me, clearly do not work.  what's the biggest battery you should assemble before you get a big drop-off in production?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Efficiency stat is still very important in determining combat capabilities.  You know that 3-gun battery of 3-Inch Ordnance Rifles you get at Gettysburg as part of Buford's delaying action?  Well, that got 1,100 kills by the end of the first day, compared to just 600 from a 24-gun battery of Napoleons.  That battery has literally 100 in every stat except Command and Firearms, compared to around a 40 Efficiency stat of my Napoleons.  It would have gotten more if I'd actually gotten a Supply Wagon sooner.

24-gun batteries of 24pdr Howitzers still do well for me, though I haven't tested after the patch.  They still blew crap away like no tomorrow though, 100+ kills per volley.

Edited by The Soldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my experience, grand batteries are at disadvantage in this game. I think dev's have tuned the game to be as historical as possible therefore having 5-6 gun batteries is very effective due to mobility, gunners each gun and survivalbility. In my first playthrough I had grand batteries and they were disappointing when compared to my smaller ones in newer playthroughs.

It's a question of how you move your artillery during battles, do you just let them sit at the same spot during the battle? Or move them all the time to where they are needed to ensure effectiviness? Moving 24 gun squad takes longer time and is more apt to get into melee status if enemy unit's are reaching your unit. Also they perform less effectively due to command effectivness that plummets with higher number of guns and gunners the commander have to bark orders to.

Edited by Leopold von Anhalt-Dessau

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Leopold von Anhalt-Dessau said:

From my experience, grand batteries are at disadvantage in this game. I think dev's have tuned the game to be as historical as possible therefore having 5-6 gun batteries is very effective due to mobility, gunners each gun and survivalbility. In my first playthrough I had grand batteries and they were disappointing when compared to my smaller ones in newer playthroughs.

It's a question of how you move your artillery during battles, do you just let them sit at the same spot during the battle? Or move them all the time to where they are needed to ensure effectiviness? Moving 24 gun squad takes longer time and is more apt to get into melee status if enemy unit's are reaching your unit. Also they perform less effectively due to command effectivness that plummets with higher number of guns and gunners the commander have to bark orders to.

This is more along the lines I am discussing.  I'm trying to figure out why my 3-star 24lb howitzer battery with 24 guns, commanded by a major general, is performing like crap.  Some interesting thoughts here especially with the higher chance of melee being triggered due to the size of the battery, i  had not considered that.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Don't Escrow Taxes said:

This is more along the lines I am discussing.  I'm trying to figure out why my 3-star 24lb howitzer battery with 24 guns, commanded by a major general, is performing like crap.  Some interesting thoughts here especially with the higher chance of melee being triggered due to the size of the battery, i  had not considered that.   

Well I supposed it's like it, more men in infantry, cav or skirmishers means bigger area of engagement. If you ever ran a small and a big cav groups at the same time, passing by fleeing groups, you notice the bigger group engaging the fleeing group and the smaller group don't when they both are in same vincinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that this ultimate general takes the cake and puts a lot of the civil war games and total war games to the test for first place. It lets you interact with the units on a personnel level and i love the direction its going. If the designers can install ultimate general with a sand box version strategically starting from fort Sumter 1861 to Appomattox surrender in 1865 it would put this game over the total war series games by a huge margin. I been playing these kind of games since computers came out and the 70's when i first discovered Avalon Hill games, Ultimate general is so far the best game design out for the civil war period and i truly hope the designers are on it to make it even better and they continue to support the product. Letting players build the army's from scratch  with a generated battle map like total war will make it that much better....allowing them to make there own strategic decisions will jump this game into hyper drive. All the pre-set up famous engagements are great don't get me wrong. But you can only play same game a few times before it becomes repetitive and gets labeled as a space saver. giving the player a new terrain map to plan his tactics will keep the ultimate general players going for years and no doubt put a few more bucks into the pockets of the designers.

    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2017 at 9:55 AM, deltahill said:

I have to say that this ultimate general takes the cake and puts a lot of the civil war games and total war games to the test for first place. It lets you interact with the units on a personnel level and i love the direction its going. If the designers can install ultimate general with a sand box version strategically starting from fort Sumter 1861 to Appomattox surrender in 1865 it would put this game over the total war series games by a huge margin. I been playing these kind of games since computers came out and the 70's when i first discovered Avalon Hill games, Ultimate general is so far the best game design out for the civil war period and i truly hope the designers are on it to make it even better and they continue to support the product. Letting players build the army's from scratch  with a generated battle map like total war will make it that much better....allowing them to make there own strategic decisions will jump this game into hyper drive. All the pre-set up famous engagements are great don't get me wrong. But you can only play same game a few times before it becomes repetitive and gets labeled as a space saver. giving the player a new terrain map to plan his tactics will keep the ultimate general players going for years and no doubt put a few more bucks into the pockets of the designers.

    

 

Really, really well said. 

Do us a personal favor, and repeat a version of this on Steam Reviews. . 

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my expeience of campaign plays, Federals generally better armed, becasuse, not for better funding anbd shop stock, but for dead rebels.

In rebel play, I just cannot afford CS richmond and had to stick with 1855, but in Fed play, CS richmond is my standard issued weapon in late campaign.

Damn irony of current game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pong said:

From my expeience of campaign plays, Federals generally better armed, becasuse, not for better funding anbd shop stock, but for dead rebels.

Really?  Usually due to having lots and lots of enemies, I find playing as the Confederates substantially easier because I can loot the bodies of all the Yankee soldiers I just killed for their rifles.  I can get upwards of 20k rifles at Antietam and 25k at Fredricksburg, meaning I practically don't have to care about weapons ever again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For quantity, yes.

But even rebs drop enough 1855 quite early stage, and so very soon I have enough quantity to arm my 1st corp with 100% looted 1855s.

And feds also drop guns so fast that I don't have to enjoy cost efficiency of Mississippi long, but it seems AIs are very long stick with 1855s, and reb AI tend to equip them higher tier rifle, CS richmond, first.

Edited by Pong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2017 at 8:51 AM, The Soldier said:

Really?  Usually due to having lots and lots of enemies, I find playing as the Confederates substantially easier because I can loot the bodies of all the Yankee soldiers I just killed for their rifles.  I can get upwards of 20k rifles at Antietam and 25k at Fredricksburg, meaning I practically don't have to care about weapons ever again.

 

On 5/4/2017 at 1:59 AM, Pong said:

From my expeience of campaign plays, Federals generally better armed, becasuse, not for better funding anbd shop stock, but for dead rebels.

 

I kinda agree with Pong. I prefer Federals usually because they allow me a lot more flexibility. While The Soldier is absolutely right in that you get to loot lots of good rifles as Confed, the Federals have so much money you can equip your soldiers with cheaper rifles, while you use the looted high tier rifles for your veteran brigades. Basically, both can loot, but one can loot for your elites while the other kinda has to survive on looted weaponry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guide has been updated to reflect Patch 0.96 plus and additions have been made including recommendations to General Unit Skills and an elaboration on the tactic that can only be described as the Human Wave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the update on 1.0 the third skill for Major Generals, Trainer, was buffed and now grants +10% XP. I think this might be valuable for the least added corps' units to gain expierence and the first skill faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2017 at 10:51 AM, The Soldier said:

Really?  Usually due to having lots and lots of enemies, I find playing as the Confederates substantially easier because I can loot the bodies of all the Yankee soldiers I just killed for their rifles.  I can get upwards of 20k rifles at Antietam and 25k at Fredricksburg, meaning I practically don't have to care about weapons ever again.

I would love to see you post vids on You Tube to see you in action on different facets of this game. You have so much to offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2017 at 7:57 PM, civsully1 said:

I would love to see you post vids on You Tube to see you in action on different facets of this game. You have so much to offer.

:wub: I'll consider doing that for a Union Campaign playthrough... I don't have the best mike though.

 

On 7/17/2017 at 7:57 PM, civsully1 said:

With the update on 1.0 the third skill for Major Generals, Trainer, was buffed and now grants +10% XP. I think this might be valuable for the least added corps' units to gain expierence and the first skill faster.

Thanks for telling me that. And yes, it would be, but more importantly (especially in late game) i just realized that the +10% xp will reduce the number of veterans you need to hire in lategame battles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hjalfnar_Feuerwolf said:

Would be great to get the guide in steam. I think there are quite a few mediocre Total War players out there getting raped by the AI. xDDD

I do have a Steam Version, but it's a pain to update b/c of the Sections in Steam. Will do when I have time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×